deweydecibel

To offer the counterpoint:

Local and private communities, if they remain only for meta content, is fine. But if they are used for other content, because they don’t want other instances seeing or interacting with it, it can permit an instance to isolate itself and its content from the rest of the fediverse, while still being able to enjoy all the shared content from other instances. I.e. show me yours, but I won’t show you mine.

Then, if these local only communities are the only places where people on that instance are sharing certain content, it’s breaking the whole idea that it shouldn’t matter what instance you’re on. If instances can remain insular, it starts making more instances attractive based on their size. “If you want to enjoy this content, come join our instance.”

Also safer spaces for groups targeted by bigots

Then they need to ban the bigots. Why should only the people on that instance have access to the safe space? Why is someone from another instance instantly judged as making the safe space less safe? It’s basically saying “come join our instance”, which is, again, going to cause unintended consequences.

It’s pretty obvious they don’t like the moderation. They linked the modlog showing what they removed. Comments had been removed by someone other than him. They didn’t care for it

And just in general, Microsoft will enshitify GitHub one day. Its inevitable for every free service run by a public for-profit corporation. You can count on this as much as you can count on climate change.

So why wait until it starts happening? Get started with the move now.

If you don’t see value in ownership, then yeah, you “saved” money. But that’s on you.

You’re also missing the part where they’re undercharging for the service in order to increase adoption, after which they will turn up the costs. So enjoy it while you can.

I approve this in spirit, but is this safe from an audit?